One of the ALFAwetlands current important results is the Report on the “Recommendations for wetland restoration” and is already available! The Report among other includes:
- Regional variability in restoration efforts
- Identification of stress factors
- Restoration measures
- Progress tracking in adaptation
Please also read: Part 1 ALFAwetlands results: Recommendations for wetland restoration.
The Figure shows countries in which restoration projects have been implemented. The number of projects included in the database is given in a box for each country.
Regional variability in restoration efforts
Wetland restoration projects span across Europe, with notable activity in the Atlantic bog region, which hosts 43% of the project sites in database. Other regions such as the raised bog region (21%) and the Nemoral-meridional fen region (18%) also show significant restoration efforts. The high concentration of restoration sites in countries like the UK, Finland, and Ireland, where peatlands are abundant, underscores the importance of these ecosystems to local biodiversity and climate mitigation efforts.
However, certain regions, such as the southern European marshes or the Arctic seepage mire regions, are less represented in the database, suggesting a gap in restoration efforts in these areas. This highlights the need for more targeted research and restoration initiatives in these underserved areas.
Identifying stress factors
Understanding the causes of wetland degradation is crucial for designing effective restoration measures. In the ALFAwetlands database, drainage stands out as the most prevalent stressor, affecting 91% of project sites. Other major stress factors include forestry, agriculture, peat extraction, and erosion. These stressors can degrade the hydrological balance, reduce biodiversity, and diminish carbon sequestration capacity.
It is essential for restoration projects to address these stressors comprehensively, employing hydrological, vegetation, and peat-specific measures to tackle both the symptoms and the underlying causes of wetland degradation.
Restoration measures: Strategies for hydrology, vegetation, and peat
- Hydrological measures: These are the most common interventions in wetland restoration, aimed at re-establishing natural water regimes. Measures such as blocking or filling drains, constructing bunds, and creating compartments are frequently used to restore wetland hydrology. The success of these measures depends on local conditions, such as peat depth, vegetation, and the presence of protected species. Hydrological restoration is closely linked to the conservation of water, carbon stocks, and typical wetland vegetation.
- Vegetation measures: Vegetation management is essential to support biodiversity and promote peat-forming species. Invasive species are often removed to allow native vegetation to regenerate, while grazing management can be adjusted to prevent overgrazing or promote the growth of specific species. The reintroduction of native peat-forming vegetation, such as Sphagnum moss, is a critical aspect of many restoration projects. In some areas, the controlled mowing of vegetation helps prevent overgrowth and fosters a balanced ecosystem.
- Peat measures: While less common, peat-specific measures aim to restore the physical structure and composition of the peat soil. These include levelling eroded peat, removing topsoil from agricultural areas to restore favorable nutrient conditions, and applying stabilizing materials to prevent further erosion.
Tracking progress and adaptation
To assess the effectiveness of restoration efforts, monitoring is essential. Monitoring activities vary by project but typically focus on four main areas: carbon sequestration, flora, fauna, and hydrology. The use of the BACI (Before-After, Control-Impact) method is particularly effective, allowing project teams to assess the long-term impacts of restoration activities.
Flora and hydrology are the most commonly monitored categories, with vegetation surveys and water level measurements frequently conducted to track changes over time. Fauna monitoring often focuses on indicator species such as dragonflies, butterflies, and birds, which are sensitive to changes in habitat quality.
In addition to scientific monitoring, community involvement is a key component of successful restoration. Citizen science initiatives, such as the “Eyes on the Bog” project in the UK, enable local communities to actively participate in data collection and contribute to the success of restoration projects.
Conclusion
Restoration projects, analyzed within the ALFAwetlands, represent a significant step towards restoring Europe’s wetlands and leveraging their full potential for climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation. By focusing on a multi-disciplinary approach and aligning restoration strategies with both ecosystem health and climate goals, these projects have the potential to transform degraded wetland landscapes into thriving, resilient ecosystems.
However, challenges remain in addressing the diverse stressors affecting wetlands and ensuring that restoration efforts are adequately monitored and adapted over time. Moving forward, a combination of tailored restoration strategies, integrated monitoring, and active stakeholder engagement will be critical to the success of wetland restoration projects across Europe. Through continued research, innovation, and collaboration, we can unlock the full potential of wetlands to mitigate climate change and safeguard biodiversity for future generations.
Follow ALFAwetlands to be the first to read the whole report and more!
This post is prepared by Vlado Vancura, European Wilderness Society´s expert.